1. Field of the Invention
The present invention concerns a test system for a user end apparatus and an automated test method for such a terminal apparatus, suitable for automated testing and diagnosis of franking machines or accounting or mail processing apparatuses or other user end apparatuses.
2. Description of the Prior Art
The T1000 line of franking machines from the manufacturer Francotyp-Postalia GmbH, which can be connected with an external service computer via an interface cable, is known for low numbers of incoming mail. Inside a security housing, the franking machine has a permanently arranged thermotransfer print head for printing a franking imprint and an external standard interface for connection of a postage scale, a service computer of the type SC03 or other peripheral apparatuses. The service computer is used only for readout and documentation of machine parameters of franking machines manufactured in a series, but effects no data input via the standard interface.
Another known franking machine of the type Jetmail® by the manufacturer Francotyp-Postalia GmbH is provided for offices with medium to high amounts of incoming mail and can likewise be connected with a service computer that (via interface cable) establishes an electrical conduction connection with the franking machine which outputs register states and machine parameters as needed.
Known from EP 675 463 B1 is a franking machine by the company SECAP that has a serial interface via which display data are wholly or partially continuously provided to the outside. A disadvantage thereof is that the operating data are continuously unconditionally provided to the outside, such as to an additionally-mountable LCD display device. It is advantageous that no intermediate personal computer is required for this purpose.
A franking machine of the company NEOPOST, which is connected with a computer or workstation for input of franking data is known from EP 493 948 B1. For general operation it is very costly for such an expensive apparatus to be required in addition to the franking machine.
U.S. Pat. No. 4,525,786 discloses a franking machine of the company Pitney Bowes in which a program fragment is stored that ensures that the critical accounting data stored in the non-volatile memory by a microprocessor of the franking machine during a last usage phase are set to predefined values, but at the same time prevents (by means of a block bit) this from occurring multiple times after the serial number of the franking machine has been input. An external terminal that can be connected via a data cable to an external franking machine interface serves for input.
A franking machine of the company Pitney Bowes that can be initialized and configured in the factory and in the field via a franking machine interface by means of an external program controller is known from U.S. Pat. No. 4,825,786. The franking machine does not need to be taken apart for testing.
The connection of a personal computer, laptop or notebook PC to a franking machine of the type Jetmail® in order to initialize the franking machine is known from DE 100 36 623 A1. An initialization ensues only after successful identification of the personal computer, laptop or notebook PC, and authorization for the initialization ensues by means of an authorization unit, for example by means of an FP card that is inserted into the chip card reader of the franking machine. The initialization also includes input of the date of the battery of a security module of the franking machine, a telephone number of the tele-postage data center of the country of destination and a postage retrieval number PAN as well as (given the use of tele-postage data center) a loading of keys for a credit downloading into the security module. No testing of franking machines manufactured in a series is provided with the aforementioned means.
An automatic self-test of a franking machine is known from U.S. Pat. No. 4,639,918, wherein the user of a franking machine can set a test mode and its keyboard is used to select (via input of a code) a test program from among a number of possible test programs such that the franking machine then executes the selected test program an can execute a diagnosis test. It is disadvantageous that a readout and documentation of diagnosis test data can ensue only visually and manually. These diagnosis test data are read out by the service computer upon a repair or cyclical testing of the franking machine, and thus not during the serial manufacture of franking machines, nor automatically.
It is generally known in the prior art to automatically test user end apparatuses at production, such that selected user end apparatuses are subjected to an endurance test in the operating mode, but franking machines are subject to very high requirements and therefore require a special approval.
In the development of franking machines, a DEBUG version and a RELEASE version are conventionally produced before the mass production of the franking machines. For error correction, the DEBUG version differs from the RELEASE version by the provision of additional hardware, measurement points and interfaces for connection of measurement and analysis apparatuses. A RELEASE version of the franking machine is given to the postal authority. Before the mass production of franking machines, approval by the postal authority or by a governmental authority charged with this responsibility is required. The postal authority either itself conducts numerous tests on the franking machine, or engages an independent testing laboratory for this testing. Naturally, the DEBUG version of a franking machine already allows a testing of at least individual components or structural groups of the franking machine, but only by the aforementioned provision of additional hardware, measurement points and interfaces for connection of measurement and analysis apparatuses. These additional means must be removed for generation of the RELEASE version of the franking machine, since otherwise the franking machine would be manipulable by a third party with fraudulent intent. Naturally no approval is awarded to a manipulable version of the franking machine. It is disadvantageous that the DEBUG version exhibits a different time response compared to the RELEASE version. In modern franking machines, current processors with very high clock speeds are operated that make a very high processing speed (and therewith modern cryptography) possible in the first place. A different time response relative to the DEBUG version therefore can cause an error, and approval of the franking machine would consequently be denied. Franking machines are in fact affected due to the very high requirements, but there are also constantly new norms to be taken into account for other user end apparatuses and therewith also new certifications to obtain if the manufacture wants to be successful in a market with its product.
In order to test a user end apparatus, in the ideal case all possible user inputs must be run through in order to test every possible behavior of the user end apparatus and to match them to the specified desired behavior. In order to also only approximately achieve this complete test, given complex and multifunction user end apparatuses the user inputs should be automated. So that the test results are significant, the automation must ensue such that the test inputs via an input event management system of the operating system of the user end apparatus are not processed with a different priority and different time response than inputs via the keyboard. Moreover, a disadvantage of the user end apparatus must be overcome, this disadvantage being that a behavior that deviates from the behavior of the user end apparatus with release software is identified in the test by a specially-created test software.
So that many functions of the user end apparatus can be tested in an automated manner, the user end apparatus must output all relevant outputs to a suitable test interface in a suitable format so that a data processing device suitable for test automation can detect, record and process the relevant outputs for each input. Limitations for the outputs result in that not all outputs are relevant and must be output by the user end apparatus with release software; some should not be output and a few must not be output.